|
Bayer to buy... Monsanto  for 23% premium: http://www.wsj.com/articles/bayer-and-monsanto-expected-to-announce-takeover-1473839357
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 10:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 16:42 |
|
|
Bayer is known for pharmaceuticals, but they produce a bunch of agrichemicals and a couple of their own GMO seedlines.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 13:52
|
|
|
FSLR 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 16:39
|
|
|
Omnicarus posted:FSLR
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
Going to buy when it hits $1, that seems to be the floor of every solar stock.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 17:09
|
|
|
So much poop
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 17:21
|
|
|
There are going to be some private equity deals in solar soon, and Total will either buy SPWR outright or sell their 65% stake to some PE firm. TSL already went private, and I'm shocked that move didn't instill more optimism. Interestingly, its turning out the huge ITC extension, which is without a doubt a fantastic positive for the industry long term, has caused some market panic in the short term due to projects being delayed and pushed back. It is hard to guess how low these will go, but FSLR, SPWR, and CSIQ should be excellent investments here for anyone with a 3-4yr timeline.I feel like I'm in some kind of alternate reality with several analysts coming out saying Solaredge and Vivint are good buys, while you should shy away from FSLR. You can bet Buffet is going to make a move at some point, he has already shown a lot of interest in the sector. greasyhands fucked around with this message at 17:31 on Sep 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
Buy more of it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 17:28
|
|
|
Omnicarus posted:FSLR Dumbass
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 17:47
|
|
|
tumor looking batty posted:Dumbass Ain't going to argue with this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
a cop posted:Buy more of it. In for a penny in for a pound. Just bought 50 more. gently caress it. I'll ride this water slide all the way to the splash pool.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
What's the FSLR bear case? That the move from projects to more commoditized products is going to kill margins? Because at current levels it looks pretty attractive otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
Agronox posted:What's the FSLR bear case? That the move from projects to more commoditized products is going to kill margins? There's really multiple facets to the bear case. Its not just that they are moving away from what was considered their bread and butter (that is a scary proposition on its own for any company, but hey the world is a dynamic place so we'll allow it without panic), but that they are basically scrambling away from it saying "Tons of new players and there is no way they are going to make money". That is a very bad warning sign. Take that sign and add to it the fact that insiders have not only *not* been buying at these depressed levels, but they have been dumping at an accelerated pace. I am starting to believe the real value in solar as a money maker is in PPAs, all the rest is probably just commodity junk. Think of solar panels as lcd screens or flash memory- both complicated, capital intensive "tech" products but all the companies that are in those fields have had exceptionally low valuations for *years*. They are highly cyclical- margins ebb and flow and companies constantly go in and out of business or get swallowed up after nearly going out of business. Solar looks a lot like those industries in a lot of ways. Lastly, the assets FSLR is carrying on their balance sheet do not have a defined value- they are worth whatever a solar power plant is worth at the time they unload it. Costs are falling extremely fast, and every day that FSLR carries these projects on their balance sheet they are essentially losing money (it doesnt matter what they spent to build it, if you can get a new 100MW plant built for half that cost)- now third parties are holding off on buying because they see the potential for much lower costs if they just wait a while. Throw in hundreds of MW worth of projects that will flood the market from the SUNE bankruptcy at some point and you can start to see why people are getting nervous.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
I don't quite understand Ford. The stock has been hilariously undervalued for years, they have nearly a 5% dividend in a period of ridiculous low bond yields, and they have been posting record profits. I understand that investors think that current levels of car sales are unsustainable, but they are currently at ~6.5 forward P/E, a ~8.0 EV/EBITDA and a forward dividend payout ratio of 32%. It looks like the market is expecting a massive cratering in sales and profitability, and I just don't see it. It is obvious that auto sales are plateauing, but the current valuation expects a repeat of 2009. They have a lot of debt and I know their sales have been fueled by financing, but at the same time they are also sitting on an ever increasing pile of cash. Finally, even if this doomsday crash does happen to the auto marker, that would have more of a justification of their current value. In reality, you know F would drop to $3 or something if it actually transpired. The market is expecting the worst and then falling more when the worst is even slightly hinted at. Honestly I was more concerned about their dimwitted foray into driver-less cars than next year's forecast. However I guess they are related as they are going to dump millions down the drain chasing a market which hasn't been proven yet (and probably won't be). Cheesemaster200 fucked around with this message at 21:51 on Sep 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
The current valuation in no rational way reflects an expectation of something like 2009. F was at about $2 in 2009. 8x EV/EBITDA is pretty reasonable for a company that has major problems if sales decrease 5%. Car makers are like airlines, they have major major problems when the economy even slightly hiccups. That comes with a valuation penalty. Also, thinking driverless cars will not be a proven market one day is probably the single worst investment thesis I've ever heard of given there are already cars on the roads driving themselves from multiple companies- yes its not perfect, but it already exists and it is the direction literally everyone is headed. Sitting on their hands and watching the driverless revolution happen would be the nail in their coffin.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 22:27
|
|
|
I would be selling my F if they weren't looking to driverless at all. I think they will be able to adapt, this isn't GM we're talking about.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 23:06
|
|
|
I actually prefer GM to F but if you remain bullish about the economy they should be good bets. Although they're both a little more sensitive to interest rate increases than they were in the past, so if you see fast and substantial hikes on the horizon it should give you pause.
Agronox fucked around with this message at 23:26 on Sep 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 23:22
|
|
|
Baddog posted:I would be selling my F if they weren't looking to driverless at all. I think they will be able to adapt, this isn't GM we're talking about. As far as adapting goes doesn't GM have their hand in a lot more pots? Driverless, electric, China, total management restructuring (as apposed to Ford), lean principles, etc. e: I guess I shouldn't say "hand in more pots", as Ford is attempting all of these, but GM seems to be putting them into action more successfully? Trash Trick fucked around with this message at 23:44 on Sep 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2016 23:23
|
|
|
greasyhands posted:The current valuation in no rational way reflects an expectation of something like 2009. F was at about $2 in 2009. 8x EV/EBITDA is pretty reasonable for a company that has major problems if sales decrease 5%. Car makers are like airlines, they have major major problems when the economy even slightly hiccups. That comes with a valuation penalty. Also, thinking driverless cars will not be a proven market one day is probably the single worst investment thesis I've ever heard of given there are already cars on the roads driving themselves from multiple companies- yes its not perfect, but it already exists and it is the direction literally everyone is headed. Sitting on their hands and watching the driverless revolution happen would be the nail in their coffin. There are currently driverless cars with professional backup drivers in the passenger seats running limited test runs to prove that the technology is possible. As someone put it very bluntly before in this thread, the second some 2-year old gets run over and killed by a driverless car, you will have community outrage and localized bans. What do you do when X county or Y municipality bans driverless vehicles? Drive around? There are too many variables involved with driving and I don't think any programmer will be able to pick them up. The concept of "oops, we will pick that up in the next firmware update" after your driverless car killed your neighbors dog is not going to be an excuse. That brings me to the biggest reason why driverless cars are never going to be adopted: the liability for each individual manufacturer is going to be completely untenable. Also, don't even get me started on how many cities are going to ban the things on the basis of "saving jobs". Cities are already banning Uber as it is, much less Uber without the employment. To quote one of my previous professors: Cheesemaster200 fucked around with this message at 01:32 on Sep 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 01:18
|
|
|
Cheesemaster200 posted:To quote one of my previous professors: can tell you how to drastically increase the safety of vehicles, while inevitably killing a few 2 year old kids along the way (fewer than human drivers) HUMANITIES can tell you how to get outraged about something even though it's already happening in the existing system Not that I disagree with you that there will be heavy regulation with more deaths, but it's completely immoral to ban them if they're proven to be safer than humans. The proof, however, will be difficult.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 03:18
|
|
|
a cop posted:
I guess if you believe that GM management is completely reformed and a lot more capable than pre-2008. I'm still a doubter. As far as autonomous driving, I hope that state departments of transportation look to enable rather than discourage it. Designing roads for autonomous driving would help a lot. That could get rather expensive if you have to support both types of driving, but if we ever get to the point where we have roads for autonomous-only, the infrastructure should get really cheap (and compact) compared to now. quote:Not that I disagree with you that there will be heavy regulation with more deaths, but it's completely immoral to ban them if they're proven to be safer than humans. The proof, however, will be difficult. Isn't the proof just going to be self-evident to anyone who spends any amount of time driving on US roads? I can't seem to go half an hour without running into a complete rear end in a top hat, a grandma who can't drive anymore, someone who is hosed up and/or crazy, or someone who never took drivers ed. Or a super sized combo of all of the above. Nearly every rush hour there is a major accident on one of the two major roads through town, killing a few people and tying everything up for a ridiculous amount of time. Even the current tesla tech, where every ten million miles you get driven at 100mph straight into the bottom of a semi, is a huge win. Baddog fucked around with this message at 03:36 on Sep 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 03:23
|
|
|
http://www.autoblog.com/2016/04/15/gm-recall-chevrolet-silverado-gmc-sierra-seatbelt/ http://blog.caranddriver.com/gm-recalls-3-6-million-cars-for-non-deploying-airbags/ 2 safety recalls that could lead to airbags failing to deploy or seatbelt buckle breaking. Have they really changed?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 04:05
|
|
|
http://www.autoblog.com/2016/06/29/two-toyota-recalls-4-million-worldwide-curtain-airbags-emissions/ http://blog.caranddriver.com/ford-recalls-2-million-cars-for-door-latches/ Recalls are a fact of life in the auto industry.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 04:13
|
|
|
a cop posted:http://www.autoblog.com/2016/06/29/two-toyota-recalls-4-million-worldwide-curtain-airbags-emissions/ Also http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/guide-to-the-volkswagen-dieselgate-emissions-recall- which may be the mother of recent recalls.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 04:18
|
|
|
Door latch, curtain airbag, or emissions vs GM's software triggering a test mode during driving shutting off the airbags and seat belt cinching? Even VW just hated the environment not their owners. I'm still waiting to see if the Fed can raise rates or not. If they don't it slowly kills the banking and insurance industry. If they do they blow up the corporate debt market and governments sourcing of cheap debt funding. If rates are raised it makes the people saying low yields on bonds justifies higher stock pricing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 04:20
|
|
|
Omnicarus posted:FSLR I refuse to look until after november at minimum
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 05:15
|
|
|
greasyhands posted:TSL already went private This is probably going to be the only profitable solar trade I made this year after jumping on at 10.34 
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 14:34
|
|
|
Saw this on Ars:quote:On Wednesday, Mobileye revealed that it ended its relationship with Tesla because "it was pushing the envelope in terms of safety." Mobileye's CTO and co-founder Amnon Shashua told Reuters that the electric vehicle maker was using his company's machine vision sensor system in applications for which it had not been designed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 15:19
|
|
|
AAPL is shooting up again because people realized again that lots of people will buy iPhones even if they have no headphone jack I guess?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 15:20
|
|
|
I have to imagine some supply chain numbers leaked out somewhere, otherwise AAPL this week doesn't make much sense. I'm not complaining but I don't get it either. The Street has pretty clearly said "Remember how you were more transparent and would release first week sales numbers? It's awesome that you stopped doing that!" Otherwise, could be a) shorts who thought the rollout without headphone jack was going to be a complete disaster covering or b) analysts looking very favorably on what the carriers are saying and doing (sales and incentives both way up over the 6 and 6s). Personally I was on the fence about the 7, but the TMobile promo was good enough to get me to upgrade from my 6. Short term movements in AAPL are inscrutable. This is the kind of stock you buy and hold on to for the long term.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 15:41
|
|
|
Agronox posted:Short term movements in AAPL are inscrutable. This is the kind of stock you buy and hold on to for the long term. Inscrutable? It always goes down when Tim talks and then shoots back up a week later.  I've held it since 2004. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 15:44
|
|
|
AAPL is up because people think the 7+ and jet black being sold out actually mean something. Meanwhile I'm holding my dick after selling on announcement day.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
Sold my AAPL this morning. Bought around $108 and it stayed below that for too long on my liking. Collected the dividend but Im out to capture some profit.
MrBigglesworth fucked around with this message at 16:17 on Sep 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 16:06
|
|
|
FSLR is trading at 3x its cash on hand. I can't believe no one has bought it to raid the cash and leave a corpse.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 16:20
|
|
|
oil up 2%?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 18:32
|
|
|
Cheesemaster200 posted:I don't quite understand Ford. The stock has been hilariously undervalued for years, they have nearly a 5% dividend in a period of ridiculous low bond yields, and they have been posting record profits. I understand that investors think that current levels of car sales are unsustainable, but they are currently at ~6.5 forward P/E, a ~8.0 EV/EBITDA and a forward dividend payout ratio of 32%. It looks like the market is expecting a massive cratering in sales and profitability, and I just don't see it. It is obvious that auto sales are plateauing, but the current valuation expects a repeat of 2009. I agree with you but dislike companies with a lot of debt.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 18:35
|
|
|
Elephanthead posted:FSLR is trading at 3x its cash on hand. I can't believe no one has bought it to raid the cash and leave a corpse. How much do we need to buy them out? I'll start the kickstarter. Hell let's make our own crowd funded corporate raiding website.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
Raidr. Come on.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 18:51
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:Raidr. Come on. I'm game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 16:42 |
|
|
Goodpancakes posted:How much do we need to buy them out? I'll start the kickstarter. Hell let's make our own crowd funded corporate raiding website. Let's do this with SAFM as well. Can I invest in Raidr Series A too?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 20:42
|
|
